Erm, the ONF forum isn't official

Discussions takes weeks for BBs. That schedule is far too tight to get anything done
correctly.

@ljsevern
one thing u should change when talking about chaos is your forum open navy field not
because its bad but rather to prefent parallel structures. Discussing things in two
different forums to find 1 solution is hard. So please close your discussion forum for MN
balance to get better overview or MM close this one and only use ONF forum since it offers
a better overview then this one.

ordering it tier by tier might be a good thing cause it seems a bit like we are running in
circels intead towards a aim. Here is a system to how it might be possible to get stuff
better ordered:
2-3days dd/cl
2-3days CA
2-3days bb1-3
2-3days bb4
2-3days bb5
2-3days bb6
3-4days ss1-4
3-5days cv1-6
3-5days planes
2-3days random stuff
send patch propusal to SDE
check if all went right

..restart and leave out tiers that are finall till all is mostly fine.

during these 2-3day periods all threads not dealing with tier in question have to be
locked. I know locking so many threads will be a lot of work for MM but i belive this is
the only way to keep community focused on current topic.

PS: is it possible to unlock premium ships for test accounts since some prem ships need
changes. A nerf for SN sevastopal, MN Mandel and reworking MN Daladier, MN/RN Dunkerque
(and i would enjoy a spread buff for IJN B65)

I think the main issue Nibor is that this in its current setup is way too chaotic.

I honestly think we should be going from top to bottom, tier by tier for this project, releasing
the updates as we do the tiers.

I feel like beeing ignored -.- I dont say u have to do what i suggest but i have posted
thinks several times and never get any answers. I would be okay if u say "we dont do this
or that change because..." but getting no answer at all makes me feel its not a community
project everyone can take part on but a project of a few people you can watch doing some
changes but are not alllowed to give your input. This sucks.

Right, so now the time pressure is the reason...

Sorry, I keep forgetting how it is always something elses fault...

Noticed it, but was too late to change. The 3 12" gunsets with the same shells makes
correct changes to range and damage very difficult.

@phat

We asked for a submergence change, not a maximum displacement change. In other
words, we didn't know how to fix it.

Angus, you should have told me that you didn't get my message.

http://www.navyfield.com/board/search.asp?Sort=C07&SearchPart=title&SearchText=submergence

I thought it was quite obvious with the first thread.

"When I did the testing for the IM, we did not notice the submergence issue. The
submergence of the IM has already been adjusted (to 3000, which IMO is too much), I
asked for a speed and spread nerf in the last test server patch. Damage needs to be
addressed with the rest of the SN 12" guns. "

So, at no point in the SN testing did you notice that it has stupidly good range, stupidly
good spread and stupidly high damage?

If you weren't so out of your depth I would find that hard to believe...